Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 75.21.231.225 (talk) at 07:15, 10 February 2007 (→Descriptions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, is believed by some to be an ape-like cryptid and by others to be the product of human imagination.

Bigfoot is sometimes described as a large, bipedal hairy hominoid creature living in remote forested wilderness areas of the United States and of Canada, specifically those in British Columbia and other parts of the Pacific Northwest, California, the Rocky Mountains, the Great Lakes region, and the forests of the U.S. Northeast and the U.S. Southern states. Some think that a Bigfoot, or its close relatives, may be found around the world under different regional names, such as the Yeti. Sightings of similar creatures have allegedly occurred in Malaysia, China, Russia, Australia, and South America.

Few scientists accept the likelihood of such a creature's existence. Most who have expressed an opinion consider the stories of Bigfoot to be a combination of unsubstantiated folklore and hoax Template:Ref harvard.

Descriptions

Individuals who have said that they have seen Bigfoot often give similar descriptions. They generally describe what is a 7 to 9 foot (2 to 2.5 meters) tall, ape- or human-like bipedal creature, broad-shouldered and of a strong build, covered in dark brown or dark reddish hair. The head seems to sit directly on the shoulders, with no visible neck ever reported. The head is pointed, similar to the sagittal crest of the male gorilla. In fact, a good description would be of a 'long-legged male gorilla'.

Reports sometimes describe large eyes (Green 1978:16), a pronounced brow, and a large, pointed, low-set forehead that is alternately reported as crested and rounded.

Enormous human-like footprints attributed to this creature gave rise to the name "Bigfoot". These footprints usually show five toes, range from more than 20 inches down to human sizes, are wider in relation to their length than human footprints and sink a great deal deeper into the ground. They are flat-footed, without an arch, and a few show an ability to bend the foot in the middle, which apes can do but humans can not.

Foul odors reminiscent of feces, sewage, carrion or strong body odor, are sometimes associated with Bigfoot reports.

What some people believe to be Sasquatch vocalizations have been described as high-pitched shrieks or whistles, alternatively as low-pitched, guttural grunting or squealing.

Opinions exist about this theoretical creature's diet. According to recently deceased Bigfoot researcher and anthropologist Grover Krantz, "the kinds of foods that are consumed by sasquatches are reported by many observers; how many of these reports are accurate is a matter of diverse opinion." (Krantz, 159) He also adds, "In general I would describe the sasquatch as omnivorous. It is probably mainly a vegetarian and what might be described as an 'opportunistic carnivore'" (ibid, 160-161).

Researchers currently attempting to determine if there really is a living creature under the myth include Dr. John Bindernagel of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, a location with many reported sightings, and Dr. Jeff Meldrum, who has specialized in analyzing the footprints and recent discovery of dermal print ridges in some of them.

Big foot animals travel through the nexus from big feet capitol on some planet because the big feet capital of there planet pays them well.

Bigfoot phenomenon

Bigfoot is one of the more famous creatures in cryptozoology. Cryptozoologist John Green has postulated that Bigfoot is a worldwide phenomenon (Green 1978:16).

The earliest unambiguous reports of gigantic ape-like creatures in the Pacific northwest date from 1924, after a series of alleged encounters at a location in Washington later dubbed Ape Canyon, as related in The Oregonian. Similar reports appear in the mainstream press dating back at least to the 1860's.

The phenomenon attained widespread notoriety in 1958 when enormous footprints were reported in Humboldt County, California.

In previous decades mainstream scientists generally ignored and dismissed the phenomena due to a lack of a representative specimen. They attributed the numerous sightings to the misidentification of common animals, mythology or folklore.

Proponents argue that every scientist who has personally examined the best available evidence has become an advocate for further scientific inquiry.

The previous mainstream perspective may be changing as several notable primatologists are now openly urging the rest of the scientific community to take a closer look at the phenomena. To ignore the quantity, consistency and apparent sincerity of eyewitnesses reports, they argue, would be unscientific. This new wave of scientific proponents suggest the pattern of anecdotal evidence is consistent with patterns of anecdotal evidence that preceded significant discoveries in the past.

Etymology

The words "Bigfoot" and "Sasquatch" are often used interchangeably, though they have different origins.

Formal use of "Sasquatch" can be traced to the 1920s, when the term was coined by J.W. Burns, a school teacher at the Chehalis, British Columbia Indian Reserve, on the Harrison River about 100 kilometres east of Vancouver. Burns collected Native American accounts of large, hairy creatures said to live in the wild. Loren Coleman and Jerome Clark wrote that Burns's "Native American informants called these beasts by various names, including 'sokqueatl' and 'soss-q'tal'" (Coleman and Clark, p. 215). Burns noted the phonetically similar names for the creatures and decided to invent one term for them all.

Over time, Burns's neologism "Sasquatch" came to be used by others, primarily in the Pacific Northwest. In 1929, Maclean's published one of Burns's articles, "Introducing British Columbia's Hairy Giants," which called the large creatures by this term.

The late Smithsonian primatologist John Napier noted that "the term Bigfoot has been in colloquial use since the early 1920's to describe large, unaccountable human-like footprints in the Pacific northwest" (Napier, 74). However, according to Loren Coleman and Jerome Clark, Andrew Genzoli (a columnist and editor at the Humbolt Times) first used "Bigfoot" in print on October 5, 1958 (Coleman and Clark, 39-40).

Eyewitness reports

The majority of Sasquatch reports are generated from areas having low human population densities, but some do originate from parks near major cities, such as Portland, Oregon,. In addition, most sightings are near rivers, creeks or lakes, and from areas where annual rainfall exceeds twenty inches (500 mm). Researchers point out that these common factors indicate patterns of a living species occupying an ecological niche, as opposed to hoaxed sightings. The late Grover Krantz noted these same data, and offered a detailed proposal for Sasquatch ecology and social behavior (Krantz, 158-171).

Critics suggest people may have mistaken bears for Bigfoot, as sightings are sometimes near habitats of bears. However, the witnesses include experienced hunters and outdoorsmen, who claim to be familiar with bears, and insist that the creatures they saw were entirely different. Biologist John Bindernagel argues there are marked differences between bears and Sasquatch reports that make confusion unlikely: "In profile, the bear's prominent snout is markedly different from the Sasquatch flat face. In frontal view, the Sasquatch squarish shoulders contrast with the bear's tapered shoulders. The Sasquatch has relatively long legs that allow for a graceful stride, in contrast with the short-legged shuffles of a bear when it walks on its hind legs. A bear's ears are usually visible, while those of the Sasquatch are apparently hidden under long hair." Krantz made similar arguments (Krantz, 5).

Problems with eyewitness reports

Napier wrote that however accurate and sincere witnesses might seem, "eyewitness reports must be treated with considerable caution ... Although we don't always know what we see, we tend to see what we know" (Napier, 19). He also adds, "without checking possible ulterior motivations, eyewitnesses cannot be acceptable as primary data" (ibid, 198).

Native American culture

There are various Native American artifacts presented as circumstantial evidence for the existence of Sasquatch.

Stone heads

Pyle writes, "Certain artifacts suggest that some Amerindians were acquainted with something having the visage of an ape," and adds: "several carved stone heads from the Columbia River basin" (Pyle, 146). Pyle also notes that prominent paleontologist Othniel Charles Marsh wrote in 1877, "Among the many stone carvings (from the Columbia) were a number of heads, which so strongly resemble those of apes that the likeness at once presents itself" (ibid). Furthermore, the stone carvings are prehistoric (a conclusion supported by B. Robert Butler, who determined the heads as dating from Wakemap Middle Period, 1500 BC to 200 AD (Halpin and Ames, 299), depicting "prognathous, chinless faces with heavy brow ridges and in at least one case a sagittal crest." Pyle adds, "relics do not prove that Bigfoot exists or that had contact with apes, but they do raise some uncomfortable questions" (Ibid, 146).

These artifacts are discussed at length by anthropologist Roderick Sprague in Carved Stone Heads of the Columbia and Sasquatch. Dozens of similar stone heads were recovered and most depict common animals. Sprague examines seven carved heads, which he argues have distinctively monkey- or ape-like features. Like Pyle, Sprague notes that this does not necessarily support Bigfoot's existence, but Sprague sees the question of what inspired the carved stone heads as intriguing and unresolved.

Face masks

In "The Tsimshian Monkey Masks and Sasquatch," the anthropologist and ethnologist Marjorie Halpin describes two wood facemasks that were collected from the Tsimshian and Nisga'a tribes (near Prince Rupert, British Columbia). One was obtained by Lieutenant G. T. Emmons in about 1914, and the other was obtained by Marius Barbeau in 1927.

Emmons described the artifact as "a mythical being found in the woods, and called today as a monkey" (Halpin and Ames, 211). Halpin also reports that the physical anthropologist R.D.E. MacPhee examined the Emmons mask and noted that it had both monkey- and ape-like features, but could not match it exactly to any recognized species (ibid, 212). Halpin details the elaborate mask-related folklore and rites pertaining to a creature called "pi'kis," which has both human and animal traits (especially connected to otters). He also describes the creature as occupying a "dangerously close intersection between human and animal" in native lore (ibid, 225). As with the carved stone heads, Halpin notes that these monkey-like masks alone do not prove that Sasquatch are real; rather, they are curious artifacts which warrant further investigation.

Problems with Native American culture as evidence

In the article, "On the Cultural Track of Sasquatch", Wayne Suttles offers a detailed examination of such legends, cited from various Pacific northwest tribes, including tales from the Salish, Lummi, Samish and Klallam peoples. Suttles confirms the often-repeated observation that none of the groups makes "real/mythical or natural/supernatural dichotomy" (Sprague and Krantz, 43). However, Suttles concludes that rather than being inspired by a real creature, "It seems more likely that these beliefs have grown out of several sources and have been maintained in several ways. One of the sources may have been a real man-like animal. But I must reluctantly admit that as I have presented data and organized arguments, I have found its track getting fainter and fainter" (ibid, 71).

Physical evidence

Bigfoot researchers make numerous claims that there is physical evidence for the creature's existence. Such evidence has seen, at best, minimal and scattered interest from mainstream experts, and is regarded as far from conclusive.

Footprints

Photographs or plaster casts of presumed Sasquatch footprints are often cited by cryptozoologists as important evidence. Krantz writes that "the push-off mound in midfootprint is one of the most impressive pieces of evidence to me" (Krantz, 36). This is a small mound of soil created "by a horizontal push of the forefoot just before it leaves the ground", present in some alleged Sasquatch tracks (ibid). Krantz argues that neither artificial wood nor rubber Sasquatch feet can create this convincing feature, as he discovered after many attempts. Most representations of these footprints would be around a US size 23.

Krantz notes, "The comfortable walking step for humans is about half the individual's standing height, or a trace more. Sasquatch step measurements correspond, in general, to stature estimates that are reported from sightings" (Krantz, 22). Krantz also reports that reputed Sasquatch steps are "in excess of three feet" (Krantz, 21), arguing that this enormous step would be difficult or impossible for hoaxers to create artificially.

Coleman and Clark write that there are some footprint hoaxes, but argue that they are often clumsy in comparison to presumably genuine prints, which "show distinctive forensic features that to investigators indicate they are not fakes" (Coleman and Clark, 42). Similarly, Krantz notes, "Toe positions can and do vary from one imprint to another of the same foot. We have several clear examples of this. It is my impression that sasquatch toes are more mobile than those on civilized human feet," and that hoaxing this detail would require detailed anatomical knowledge, as well as dozens or hundreds of different casts for each set of Bigfoot tracks, making a hoax unlikely (Krantz, 23).

Gaussian curve

Researcher Henry Franzoni writes:

A strong piece of evidence which suggests that the footprints are not due to a hoax or hoaxers is from Dr. W. Henner Farenbach. He has studied a database of 550 track cast length measurements and has made some preliminary observations... The Gaussian distribution of the 550 footprint lengths gives a curve that is very similar to the curve given by living populations of known animals without much sexual dimorphism in footprint length. The standard error is very low, so additions to the database will not affect the result very much. It is not very likely that coordinated groups of hoaxers conspiring together for 38 years (the time span covered by the database of track measurements) could provide such a 'life-like' distribution in footprint lengths. Groups of hoaxers who did not conspire together would almost certainly result in a non-Gaussian distribution for the database of footprint lengths."

Similarly, in Population Clines of the North American Sasquatch as Evidenced by Track Length and Average Status, anthropologist George Gill writes, "The preliminary results of our study support the hypothesis that Sasquatch actually exists ... not only seem to exist, but conform to ecogeographical rules" (Halpin and Ames, 272).

Deformity

A series of alleged Bigfoot tracks found near Bossburg, Washington, in 1969 appeared to show that the creature's right foot was affected by clubfoot. The deformed footprints are consistent with genuine disfigurement, and some argue that a hoax is unlikely. John Napier wrote of this case, "It is very difficult to conceive of a hoaxer so subtle, so knowledgeable; and so sick; who would deliberately fake a footprint of this nature. I suppose it is possible, but it is so unlikely that I am prepared to discount it." Krantz declared that "analysis of the apparent anatomy of these tracks proved to be the first convincing evidence... that the animals were real" (Krantz, 54).

Handprints

As another argument offered for the existence of Bigfoot, Krantz cited two alleged Sasquatch handprints taken from northeastern Washington in the summer of 1970. He claims the prints were of a left hand, showing a very broad, flat palm (more than twice as broad as Krantz' own larger-than-average hands) with stubby fingers, lacking an opposable thumb. Krantz writes that the prints have "many irregularities ... which cannot be identified in terms of human anatomy" (Sprague and Krantz, 118).

Another pair of alleged handprints was recovered in the late 1980s by Paul Freeman and given to Krantz for analysis; for similar reasons, Krantz judged them genuine (Krantz, 47-51).

Fingerprints

Several alleged Bigfoot hand and foot impressions said to contain dermal ridges (fingerprints) have been discovered; fingerprints are present only on humans and other primates.

Krantz reports that he offered casts of these prints to "more than forty" law enforcement fingerprint specialists across Canada and the United States for study. The reactions that he received ranged from "'very interesting' and 'they sure look real' to 'there is no doubt these are real.' The only exception was the Federal Bureau of Investigation expert who had said something to this effect, 'The implications of this are just too much; I can't believe it's real'" (Krantz, 71).

Krantz offered these same casts to physical anthropologists and primatologists. Conclusions were similarly varied, with several ruling them hoaxes. Tim White, unlike most respondents, said there was "no good reason to reject them" (ibid). Opinion remains divided, however, with suggestions that the man who allegedly discovered the prints had confessed to other hoaxes.

One of the casts with visible fingerprints showed what Krantz took to be sweat pores. Krantz reports that "police expert Benny Kling ... commented that anyone who could engrave ridge detail of such quantity and quality should be making counterfeit money" (Krantz, 77). This same print showed dysplasia, a common minor irregularity. Krantz writes, "The late Robert Olson was particularly impressed with this irregularity, as was Ed Palma of the San Diego Police Department" (ibid).

Body cast

The so-called Skookum Body Cast was collected in the summer of 2000 after the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) "set out fruit in and around a 'mud trap' they'd constructed to catch some Bigfoot tracks' (Coleman, Bigfoot!, 20-21). Researchers argue that the impression left in a muddy patch could be the impression of a Sasquatch. 325 pounds of casting material was used to capture a "half-body print" consisting of an imprint of what has been called "a Sasquatch's butt, ankles, testicles, hip, thigh, left arm, and apparent hair on the body" (Coleman, op. cit). Prominent primate expert Daris Swindler said, "In my opinion the impression is not made by a deer, a bear or an elk nor was it made artificially. The Skookum body cast is that of an unknown hominoid primate". Skookum is the Native American Chinook word for Bigfoot or Sasquatch and according to Joel Freeman, a Chinook Indian historian, "Skookum" simply meant "powerful" (Coleman, 18).

Hair and blood

Hairs retrieved from a bush in 1968 near Riggins, Idaho were given to Roy Pinker, a police science instructor at California State University, Los Angeles. Pinker concluded that the hair samples did not match any samples from known animal species. Pinker also stated that he could not attribute them as being Bigfoot hairs without a bonafide Bigfoot hair sample to compare to. (Halpin, M. & Ames, M. Manlike Monsters on Trial, p. 296. University of British Columbia Press). Pinker's analysis did not use DNA testing, which was not developed until years afterwards. In "Analysis of Feces and Hair Suspected to be of Sasquatch Origin", anthropologist Vaughn M. Bryant Jr. and ecologist Burleigh Trevor-Deutch report the analysis of six alleged Bigfoot hairs recovered near Riggins, Idaho. (Halpin & Ames, pp. 191-200.). They examined several sets of hair samples and their results were inconclusive, but the samples appeared to be most similar to those from a Black bear.

Hair samples were also taken from a house located on the Lummi Indian reservation in Washington. Three more samples were retrieved from Maryland, Oregon and California. Forensic Anthropologist Dr. Ellis R. Kerley and Physical Anthropologist Dr. Stephen Rosen of the University of Maryland, as well as Tom Moore, the Supervisor of the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory, examined the hair samples and stated that all the hair samples matched in terms of belonging to a "non species specific mammal". They concurred in finding that the four sets matched each other, were similar to gorilla and human but were neither, and they did not match 84 other species of North American mammals. ("The Bigfoot Evidence", pp22-29, Frontiers of Science Magazine, Vol. III, no.3, May 1981). Blood associated with the sample from Idaho was tested by Dr. Vincent Sarich of the University of California and found to be that of an unknown higher primate. ("The Bigfoot Evidence", pp22-29, Frontiers of Science Magazine, Vol. III, no.3, May 1981). These were not subjected to DNA testing, which was not available for years afterwards.

Problems with physical evidence

Absence of fossil evidence

Critics think it significant that the fossil record provides no support for Sasquatch. There is ample fossil evidence in North America of prehistoric species of bear, cougar, moose and mammoth. Yet, aside from clearly human remains, there is no evidence of a prehistoric hominid or any other North American primate. A skeleton, or even a bone of a huge primate, if discovered, could not be mistaken as coming from any other North American mammal. Additionally, no one has found coproliths (fossilized dung) from a Bigfoot.

Bigfoot researchers argue that the absence of fossilized evidence is not evidence of fossil absence. Sasquatch is not represented in the fossil record, but neither are gorillas nor chimpanzees. Coleman and Patrick Huyghe note that "no one will look for such fossils, if the creatures involved are not thought to exist in the first place. But even with recognized primates, fossil finds are usually meager at best" (Coleman and Huyhge, 162). However, it is worth noting that gorillas, chimpanzees and most other primates live in tropical rain-forests where conditions are unsuitable to create fossils, and in areas where few or no archeological studies were undertaken. In contrast, there are thousands of known remains of native American mammals and humans.

As to the lack of Bigfoot remains, Krantz suggested that this alone is not a valid argument against the creature's actuality. Noting that most animals hide before they die and are then quickly lost to scavengers, he writes, "I have yet to meet anyone who has found the remains of a bear that was not killed by human activity." (Krantz, 10) Fossilization also requires "ideal" conditions, such as being covered by a landslide, mudslide, or other deposit soon after death so that mineralization can take place on an undisturbed carcass.

It is also possible that if Sasquatch remains were ever found, they might have been assumed to have been a large human. Unusually large American Indian remains (sizes greater than six and a half feet) have been found in Ohio, Utah, and Tennessee throughout the 1800's. One such account was recorded by author John Haywood in his book, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee. In this account Haywood described skeletons found in White County, Tennessee, in 1821 which averaged at least 7 feet in length.

Inconclusive evidence

Most scientists find that the physical evidence, cited as supporting the existence of Bigfoot, has been ambiguous at best, or hoaxes at worst. There have been no dead bodies, bones or artifacts. There have been reported samples of fur and feces, but aside from the hair analysis by Dr. Rosen, none have been ruled conclusively (or by multiple authorities) as originating from any unknown animal. Some reputed Bigfoot samples, studied using DNA testing, were judged to have come from common animals. One such case earned press attention in mid-2005 when the alleged Bigfoot hairs were identified by University of Alberta geneticist David Coltman as originating from a bison. Other hair samples did not contain hair follicles, so DNA analysis was impossible.

Audio and visual evidence

Audio

Analyses of purported Sasquatch vocalizations have been recorded and analyzed, leading bioacoustics expert Dr. Robert Benson of Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi to report that some recordings "left him puzzled", and helped change his opinion "from being a raving skeptic to being curiously receptive."

Visual

There have been several alleged photos or motion pictures of Bigfoot. The best-known was filmed by Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin on October 20, 1967. This film has generated much discussion and debate but there has always been doubt that the Patterson-Gimlin film is genuine.

Psychological explanations

Ecologist Robert Michael Pyle says most cultures have human-like giants in their folk history. "We have this need for some larger-than-life creature."

Hoaxes

On rare occasions a bigfoot sighting or track find is shown to be a hoax.

Author Jerome Clark argues that the "Jacko" affair, involving an 1884 newspaper report of an ape-like creature captured in British Columbia (details below), was a hoax. Citing research by John Green, who uncovered the fact that several other contemporary British Columbia newspapers regarded the alleged capture as most dubious, Clark notes that the New Westminster, British Columbia Mainland Guardian wrote, "Absurdity is written on the face of it" (Clark, 195). Interestingly, Clark failed to see the same possibilities when researching cattle mutilations, calling them "extraterrestrial" in nature.

In the past ten years the style of bigfoot hoaxes that have won wider attention from the press were false claims of hoaxing famous pieces of evidence such as the Patterson Footage or the Jerry Crew tracks from Bluff Creek.

In 1958 bulldozer operator Jerry Crew took to a newspaper office a cast of one of the enormous footprints he and other workers had been seeing at an isolated work site in Bluff Creek, California. The story and photo garnered international attention through being picked up by the Associated Press (Krantz, 5). Crew was overseen by Wilbur L. Wallace, brother of Raymond L. Wallace. Years after the track casts were made, Ray Wallce got involved in bigfoot research and made various outlandish claims. He was poorly regarded by many who took the subject seriously. Napier wrote, "I do not feel impressed with Mr. Wallace's story" regarding having over 15,000 feet of film showing Bigfoot (Napier, 89).

Shortly after the death of Ray Wallace his children claimed he was the "father of bigfoot". They claimed Ray faked the tracks seen by Jerry Crew in 1958. There were some wooden track stompers among Ray's inherited belongings which the family claimed were used to make the 1958 tracks. The shape of Ray's wooden track stompers did not match the shape of the Crew track, but the Wallace photo did provide a catchy visual element for the news story, which circulated internationally as "The Father of Bigfoot Dies." At the height of the publicity the Wallace family sold the story rights to a Hollywood filmmaker. The film, set to star actor Judge Reinhold, was never produced.

Canadian newspaperman John Green was closer to the Jerry Crew events than any other living journalist. He points out the Ray never claimed to have made the Bluff Creek tracks, and Ray was not present in the Bluff Creek area when the Crew cast was obtained. Wallace had road-building contracts in various parts of the Northwest and was usually not around in Bluff Creek. Years after the fact, Wallace attempted to capitalize on the interest in various ways. He tried to sell various items from a roadside shop, including bigfoot footprint replicas, which he made behind his shop using a pair of wooden track stompers.

Arguments against the hoax explanation

Primatologist John Napier acknowledged that there have been some hoaxes but also contended that hoaxing is often an inadequate explanation. Krantz argues that "something like 100,000 casual hoaxers" would be required to explain the footprints (Krantz, 32-34).

As noted above, it was claimed that Ray Wallace began the modern Bigfoot phenomenon in 1958 by using phony foot casts to leave Bigfoot prints in Humbolt County, California. His family received major press attention in 2002 when they detailed what they said were Wallace's activities. Wallace himself never made any such claims, and Bigfoot supporters deny them. One writer, for example, argues: "The wooden track stompers shown to the media by the Wallace family do not match photos of the 1958 tracks they claim their father made. They are different foot shapes."

It's also worth noting that Sasquatch reports antedate Wallace's claims by several decades -- see Burns's Maclean articles of the 1920s , and a series in The Oregonian from 1924 about the alleged Ape Canyon attacks .

Mainstream response

Skeptics

Mainstream scientists and academics generally "discount the existence of Bigfoot because the evidence supporting belief in the survival of a prehistoric, bipedal, ape-like creature of such dimensions is scant"..

Furthermore, Bigfoot is alleged to live in region that would be unusual for a large, non-human primate: all other recognized non-human apes are found in the tropics, in Africa, continental Asia or nearby islands. The great apes have never been found in the fossil record in the Americas. No Bigfoot bones or bodies have been found.

Furthermore, the issue is so muddied with dubious claims and outright hoaxes that many scientists do not give the subject serious attention. Napier wrote that the mainstream scientific community's indifference stems primarily from "insufficient evidence ... it is hardly unsurprising that scientists prefer to investigate the probable rather than beat their heads against the wall of the faintly possible" (Napier, 15). Anthropologist David Daegling echoed this idea, citing a "remarkably limited amount of Sasquatch data that are amenable to scientific scrutiny." (Daegling, 61) He also suggests mainstream skeptics should take a proactive position "to offer an alternative explanation. We have to explain why we see Bigfoot when there is no such animal" (ibid 20). While he does have some pointed criticism for mainstream science and academia, Krantz concedes that while "the Scientific Establishment generally resists new ideas ... there is a good reason for it ... Quite simply put, new and innovative ideas in science are almost always wrong" (Krantz, 236).

On May 24, 2006 Maria Goodavage wrote an article in USA Today entitled, "Bigfoot Merely Amuses Most Scientists". In it she quoted John Crane, a zoologist and biologist at Washington State, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."

Proponents

Although most scientists find current evidence regarding Bigfoot unpersuasive, a number of prominent experts have spoken out on the subject, offering sympathetic opinions.

In a 2002 interview on National Public Radio, Jane Goodall first publicly expressed her views on bigfoot, "Well, I'm a romantic, so I always wanted them to exist. . . . Of course, the big, the big criticism of all this is, 'Where is the body?' You know, why isn't there a body? I can't answer that, and maybe they don't exist, but I want them to." Several other prominent scientists have also expressed at least a guarded interest in Sasquatch reports including George Schaller, Russell Mittermeier, Daris Swindler and Esteban Sarmiento.

Prominent anthropologist Carleton S. Coon's posthumously published essay Why the Sasquatch Must Exist states, "Even before I read John Green's book Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us, first published in 1978, I accepted Sasquatch's existence" (Markotic and Krantz, 46). Coon examines the question from several angles, stating that he is confident only in ruling out a relict Neanderthal population as a viable candidate for Sasquatch reports.

As noted above, Napier generally argued against Bigfoot's reality, but he also argued that some "soft evidence" (eyewitnesses, footprints, hair and droppings) is compelling enough that he advises against "dismissing its reality out of hand" (Napier, 197).

Krantz and others have argued that a double standard is applied by many academics to Sasquatch studies: When a claim is made or evidence is presented alleging that Sasquatch is genuine, enormous scrutiny is applied to the claim or evidence, as well as it should be. Yet when individuals claim to have hoaxed Bigfoot evidence, their claims are often quickly accepted, though they typically lack corroborative evidence.

In 2004, Henry Gee, editor of the prestigious Nature, argued that creatures like Bigfoot deserved further study, writing, "The discovery that Homo floresiensis survived until so very recently, in geological terms, makes it more likely that stories of other mythical, human-like creatures such as Yetis are founded on grains of truth ... Now, cryptozoology, the study of such fabulous creatures, can come in from the cold."

Proposed creatures

Various types of creature have been proposed by proponents to explain the sightings. These explanations have seen very little support from mainstream scientists.

Gigantopithecus

Krantz argued that a relict population of Gigantopithecus blacki was the most likely candidate to explain Bigfoot reports. Based on his analysis of its jaws, he championed a view that Gigantopithecus was bipedal.

Bourne writes that Gigantopithecus was a plausible candidate for Bigfoot since most Gigantopithecus fossils had been recovered from China, and also that extreme eastern Siberia has forests similar to northwestern North America. Many recognized animals were known to have migrated across the Bering Strait, so it was not an unreasonable notion that Gigantopithecus could have as well. "So perhaps," Bourne writes, "Gigantopithecus is the Bigfoot of the American continent and perhaps he is also the Yeti of the Himalayas" (Bourne, 296).

This Gigantopithecus hypothesis is generally considered highly speculative. Rigorous studies of the existing fossilized remains seem to indicate that G. blacki is the common ancestor of two quadrupedal genera, represented by Sivapithecus and the orangutan (Pongo). Given the mainstream view that Gigantopithecus was a quadruped, it seems most unlikely that it could be an ancestor to a biped, as Bigfoot is said to be. Furthermore, it has been argued that G. blackis enormous mass would have made it difficult for it to adopt a bipedal gait. However, an analysis of the famous Patterson-Gimlin film shows that frames 369, 370, 371, and 372 all show a slender lower mandible, that does not match the massive lower mandible of Gigantopithecus blacki, which, assuming that the Patterson-Gimlin film is legitimate, would eliminate G. blacki as a candidate for Bigfoot. (Bigfoot Coop Newsletter, March 1997, also the documentary Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science).

"That Gigantopithicus is in fact extinct has been questioned by those who believe it survives as the Yeti of the Himalayas and the Sasquatch of the Northwest American coast. But the evidence for these creatures is not convincing." (Campbell p.100)

• The Bigfoot Giganto Theory

Other fossil apes

A species of Paranthropus, such as Paranthropus robustus, which had a crested skull and naturally bipedal gait, was suggested both by Napier and by anthropologist Gordon Strasenburg as a possible candidate for the bigfoot's identity.

Some Bigfoot reports suggest Homo erectus. H. erectus skeletons have never been found on the continent.

A little known subspecies of the Homo erectus, is Meganthropus, which reputedly grew to enormous proportions. Again, there have been no remains of this creature anywhere near North America, and none more recent than a million years old.

Formal studies of Bigfoot

There have been a limited number of formal scientific studies of Bigfoot or Sasquatch, and a small number of scientists with mainstream training have examined the evidence.

1950s

Zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans’s 1955 magnum opus, On The Track of Unknown Animals, did not specifically discuss Bigfoot, but did discuss Yeti accounts and is often seen as the root of cryptozoology.

1960s

Zoologist Ivan T. Sanderson’s articles on mysterious animals, some appearing in the Saturday Evening Post, as well as his book Abominable Snowmen: Legend Comes To Life (ISBN 0-515-04444-X) that went through several printings, were aimed at popular audiences. Krantz characterizes Sanderson’s writing as "'enthusiastic' ... reporting data from a variety of sources with what seemed to be little concern for consistency or verification," an approach which "certainly lowered his credibility in the eyes of the few scientists who read his work" (Krantz, 1). Sanderson’s book remains notable as perhaps the first book-length survey of enigmatic "hairy hominids", and certainly helped popularize Yeti, Bigfoot and other mysterious primates, reported worldwide. Ivan T. Sanderson is also credited for interviewing Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin four months after the filming of the Patterson-Gimlin film in 1968 February issue of Argosy magazine. In his last year of life, Sanderson gave up on conventional explanations and adopted a paranormal view of Bigfoot. (Pursuit Magazine, 1980)

1970s

Perhaps, the first mainstream scientific study of available evidence was by Napier. Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality (ISBN 0-525-06658-6) offers an even-handed and sympathetic examination of the subject. While giving high marks to some earlier researchers ("Ivan T. Sanderson and John Green and René Dahinden... have made a far better job of recording the major events of the sasquatch saga than I could ever hope to do." (Napier, 73)), Napier also wrote that if we are to form a conclusion based on scant extant "'hard' evidence," science must declare "Bigfoot does not exist" (ibid, 197).

Yet this conclusion is qualified, as Napier seemed willing to leave the question unresolved. He found it difficult to entirely reject thousands of alleged tracks, "scattered over 125,000 square miles” or to dismiss all "the many hundreds" of eyewitnesses. He also adds that "if one track is genuine and one report is true-bill, then myth must be chucked out the window and reality admitted through the front door" (ibid, 203). In the end, Napier writes, "I am convinced that Sasquatch exists, but whether it is all it is cracked up to be is another matter altogether. There must be something in north-west America that needs explaining, and that something leaves man-like footprints." (ibid, 205) Decades later, Krantz suggests that Napier "stuck his neck out a lot further than most primatologists by writing a book about hairy bipeds in which he took the subject quite seriously" (Krantz, 240).

In 1974, the National Wildlife Federation funded a field study, seeking Bigfoot evidence. No formal federation members were involved, and the study made no notable discoveries (Bourne, 295).

The 1975 The Gentle Giants: The Gorilla Story (ISBN 0-399-11528-5) was co-authored by Geoffrey H. Bourne, another noted primatologist. Its final chapter is a brief summary of various mystery primate reports worldwide. Like Napier, he laments the dearth of physical evidence, but Bourne does not dismiss Sasquatch or Yeti as impossible.

From May 10-May 13 1978, the University of British Columbia hosted a symposium, Anthropology of the Unknown: Sasquatch and Similar Phenomena, a Conference on Humanoid Monsters. Presented, were 35 papers (abstracts collected in Wasson, 141-154). Most attendees came from anthropology backgrounds, and Pyle writes that the conference "brought together twenty professors in various fields, along with several serious laymen, to consider the mythology, ethnology, ecology, biogeography, physiology, psychology, history and sociology of the subject. All took it seriously, and while few, if any, accepted the existence of Sasquatch outright, they jointly concluded 'that there are not reasonable grounds to dismiss all the evidence as misinterpretation or hoax'" (Pyle, 186).

Following this modest peak in interest in the late 1970s, there has been little formal academic interest in the subject; many experts see further study as a waste of time. In more recent years, Krantz achieved a degree of notoriety as probably the leading accredited expert to devote considerable effort to the subject, though a few professionals have followed in his footsteps. Few have endorsed Krantz’ conclusions that Sasquatch is a real creature, but at the very least, such supporters argue that serious studies on the subject deserve fair consideration.

1980s

Some papers presented at the symposium were collected in 1980 as Manlike Monsters on Trial: Early Records and Modern Evidence, edited by Marjorie Halpin and Michael Ames.

1990s

It’s worth noting that Pyle's Where Bigfoot Walks: Crossing the Dark Divide (ISBN 0-395-85701-5), as much a survey of Bigfoot’s cultural impact as of the likelihood of the creature’s reality, was researched and written with a grant from the Guggenheim Foundation. Pyle, author of Wintergreen, the acclaimed 1987 requiem for the forests of Washington's Willapa Hills, had well established his credentials as a scientist and nature writer.

1997 - Italian mountaineer, Reinhold Messner, claimed to have come face to face with a Yeti. He has since written a book, My Quest for the Yeti: Confronting the Himalayas' Deepest Mystery (ISBN 0-312-27078-X), in which he argues that the Yeti was actually an endangered Himalayan brown bear that can walk upright or on all fours.

2000s

Beginning in 2000 the American/Canadian association called the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization began organizing informal searches of wilderness areas in the U.S and Canada where sightings have been reported. During these searches several sightings and track finds have reportedly occurred. The most notable piece of evidence obtained so far is the Skookum Body Cast. The group expects their accumulating observations and evidence will lead to formal long-term studies in certain areas where sightings and tracks occur most frequently.

Reported sightings of three giant human-like creatures in Malaysia's Endau Rompin National Park in late 2005 led to the formation of an official Bigfoot-tracking team, appointed by the state's Chief Minister, Abdul Ghani Othman in January of 2006. "Bigfoot" fever struck Johor after three fishermen reported seeing the creatures and took a photograph of a footprint, which was printed in Malaysian newspapers. The Singapore Paranormal Investigators have also joined in the search.

Bigfoot in popular culture

See article: Bigfoot in popular culture.

Alleged Bigfoot sightings

• 1811: On January 7 1811, David Thompson, a surveyor and trader for the North West Company, spotted large, well-defined footprints in the snow near Athabasca River, Jasper, Alberta, while attempting to cross the Rocky Mountains. The tracks measured 14 inches in length and 8 inches in width.
• 1840: Protestant missionary Reverend Elkanah Walker recorded myths of hairy giants that were persistent among Native Americans living in Spokane, Washington. The Indians reported that these giants steal salmon and have a strong smell.
• 1870: An account by a California hunter who claimed seeing a sasquatch scattering his campfire remains was printed in the Titusville, Pennsylvania Morning Herald on November 10, 1870. The incident reportedly occurred a year before, in the mountains near Grayson, CA.
• 1893: An account by Theodore Roosevelt was published in The Wilderness Hunter. Roosevelt related a story which was told to him by "a beaten old mountain hunter, named Bauman" living in Idaho. Some have suggested similarities to Bigfoot reports. (Note: Roosevelt's testimony is the only evidence this encounter ever occurred).
• 1924: Albert Ostman claimed to have been kidnapped and held captive for several days by a family of sasquatch. The incident occurred during the summer in Toba Inlet, British Columbia.
• 1924: Fred Beck and four other miners claimed to have been attacked by several sasquatches in Ape Canyon in July, 1924. The creatures reportedly hurled large rocks at the miners’ cabin for several hours during the night. This case was publicized in newspaper reports printed in 1924. ,
• 1941: Jeannie Chapman and her children claimed to have escaped their home when a large sasquatch, allegedly 7½ feet tall, approached their residence in Ruby Creek, British Columbia.
• 1940s onward: People living in Fouke, Arkansas have reported that a Bigfoot-like creature, dubbed the “Fouke Monster”, inhabits the region. A high number of reports have occurred in the Boggy Creek area and are the basis for the 1973 film The Legend of Boggy Creek. ,, , , ,
• 1955: William Roe claimed to have seen a close-up view of a female sasquatch from concealment near Mica Mountain, British Columbia.
• 1958: Two construction workers, Leslie Breazale and Ray Kerr, reported seeing a sasquatch about 45 miles northeast of Eureka, California. Sixteen-inch tracks had previously been spotted in the Northern California woods.
• 1967: On October 20 1967, Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin captured a purported sasquatch on film in Bluff Creek, California in what would come to be known as the Patterson-Gimlin film.
• 1995: On August 28 1995, a TV film crew from Waterland Productions pulled off the road into Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park and filmed what they claimed to be a sasquatch in their RV's Headlights.
• 2006: On December 14 2006, Shaylane Beatty, a woman from the Dechambault Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada, was driving to Prince Albert when, she claimed, saw the creature near the side of the highway at Torch River. Several men from the village drove down to the area and found footprints, which they tracked through the snow. They found a tuft of brown hair and took photographs of the tracks.

Footnotes

1. The method of locomotion for Gigantopithecus is not entirely certain, as no pelvis or leg bone has ever been found; the only remains of Gigantopithecus being discovered is the teeth and mandible. A minority opinion, championed by Grover Krantz, holds that the mandible shape and structure suggests bipedal locomotion. The only fossil evidence of Gigantopithecus — the mandible and teeth— are U-shaped, like the bipedal humans, rather than V-shaped, like the great apes. A complete fossil specimen, with the pelvis and leg bones, would be necessary to conclusively resolve the debate one way or the other, but are absent to date.
2. Gorillas are in the same taxon as chimpanzees; gorillas are more closely related to humans and chimpanzees than any of them are to orangutans.

See also

• Almas - Mongolia's Bigfoot
• Barmanou - Afghanistan and Pakistan
• Dzonokwa - British Columbia Coast, Canada
• Ebu Gogo - Flores Island, Indonesia
• Fear liath - Scotland
• Fouke Monster - Fouke, Arkansas.
• Giant (mythology) - worldwide survey of giant races and legends
• Hibagon - Japan's Bigfoot
• Kapre - Philippines.
• Momo the Monster - Missouri.
• Nguoi Rung - Vietnam
• Orang Pendak - Sumatra, Indonesia.
• Orang Mawas - Malaysia
• Sasquatch - A super hero named after the creature
• Skunk Ape - Florida
• Windigo - Canadian Shield
• Lake Minnewanka Wildman - Western Canada
• Woodwose - Medieval Europe
• Yeren - the Mainland China
• Yeti - Tibet's Bigfoot
• Yowie - Australia's Bigfoot
• Bunyip - Australia
• The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization
• List of hoaxes

References

Notes

1. Cable News Network LP, LLLP (2005). 'Bigfoot' sighting in China.
2. ^ Robert Todd Carroll (2005). Bigfoot . Cite error: The named reference "skepdic" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
3. http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/bigfoothoaxes.html
4. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_2_26/ai_83585957
5. http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/photos/bigfoot1.html
6. Sheppard Software (GNU Free Documentation License). Bigfoot.
7. Lloyd Pye (2006). Various Depictions of Hominids.
8. About, Inc., A part of The New York Times Company (2006). Smelly Bigfoot: The Skunk Ape.
9. Autumn Williams (1996-2006). Bigfoot/Sasquatch sounds on the Internet.
10. Meldrum, Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science, 2006, ISBN 0-7653-1216-6
11. Roger Thomas (date of copyright unlisted) Bigfoot/Sasquatch FAQ.
12. cddc.vt.edu (date of copyright unlisted). The Silence of Sasquatch: Toeing the Dark Divide purporting to quote from, "A Bona Fide Bigfoot Sighting in Forest Park" by P. Stanford, Portland Tribune, August 17, 2001. p.A2.
13. Roger Thomas (date of copyright unlisted) Tales of Bigfoot legend include sightings in Georgia — even Clarke County.
14. Roger Thomas (date of copyright unlisted) Sasquatches In Our Woods.
15. Roger Thomas (date of copyright unlisted) Bigfoot/Sasquatch FAQ: Question 1: Is "Bigfoot" real? And if you believe it is real, what is your best evidence for believing so?.
16. Roger Thomas (date of copyright unlisted) Cripplefoot hobbled.
17. Roger Thomas (date of copyright unlisted) Analysis of Feces and Hair Suspected to Be of Sasquatch Origin.
18. MSNBC.com (2006). Bison, not Bigfoot, stomped through Canada.
19. USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. (2006). Bigfoot's indelible imprint.
20. BFRO.net (2006). Wallace Hoax Behind Bigfoot?.
21. BFRO.net (2006). Transcript of Dr. Jane Goodall's Comments on NPR Regarding Sasquatch.
22. Nature Publishing Group (2004). Flores, God and Cryptozoology (available only with subscription).
23. The Hamilton Spectator (1991-2006). Stalking Bigfoot.

Other references

• Allen Zullo, The Ten Creepiest Creatures In America, Published by Troll Communications, ISBN 0-8167-4288-X. One of many sources for the Fouke Monster and Momo the Monster.
• Bayanov, Dmitri, America's Bigfoot: Fact, Not Fiction, Crypto-Logos, 1997, ISBN 5-900229-22-X

• Alex Boese (2002). The Museum of Hoaxes: A Collection of Pranks, Stunts, Deceptions, and Other Wonderful Stories Contrived for the Public from the Middle Ages to the New Millennium. Dutton/Penguin Books. ISBN 0-525-94678-0.

• Bourne, Geoffrey H. and Maury Cohen, The Gentle Giants: The Gorilla Story, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1975, ISBN 0-399-11528-5
• Bryant, Vaughn M. and Burleigh Trevor-Deutch, "Analysis of Feces and Hair Suspected to be of Sasquatch Origin" (in Halpin and Ames)
• Byrne, Peter, The Search for Bigfoot: Monster, Man or Myth, Acropolis Books, 1975, ISBN 0-87491-159-1
• Campbell, Bernard G., Humankind Emerging, Little, Brown and Company, 1979, Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 78-78234
• Clark, Jerome, Unexplained! 347 Strange Sightings, Incredible Occurrences and Puzzling Physical Phenomena, Visible Ink, 1993, ISBN 0-8103-9436-7
• Coleman, Loren and Jerome Clark, Cryptozoology A to Z, Fireside Books, 1999, ISBN 0-684-85602-6
• Coleman, Loren and Patrick Huyghe, The Field Guide to Bigfoot, Yeti and Other Mystery Primates Worldwide, Avon Books, 1999, ISBN 0-380-80263-5
• Coon, Carelton, "Why Sasquatch Must Exist" (in Markotic and Krantz)
• Daegling, David J, Bigfoot Exposed: An Anthropologist Examines America's Enduring Legend, Altamira Press, 2004, ISBN 0-7591-0539-1
• Gill, George "Population Clines of the North American Sasquatch as Evidenced by Track Lengths and Average Status" (in Halpin and Ames)
• Green, John Willison, Sasquatch - The Apes Among Us, Hancock House Publishing, 1978, ISBN 0-88839-123-4
• Guttilla, Peter, The Bigfoot Files, Timeless Voyager Press, 2003, ISBN 1-892264-15-3
• Halprin, Marjorie, "The Tsimshan Monkey Mask and Sasquatch" (in Halpin and Ames)
• Halpin, Marjorie and Michael Ames, editors, Manlike Monsters on Trial: Early Records and Modern Evidence, University of British Columbia Press, 1980, ISBN 0-7748-0119-0
• Hunter, Don and Rene Dahinden, Sasquach/Bigfoot: The Search for North America's Incredible Creature, Firefly Books, 1993, ISBN 1-895565-28-6
• Krantz, Grover S., Big Footprints: A Scientific Inquiry into the Reality of Sasquatch, Johnson Books, 1992, ISBN 1-55566-099-1
• Long, Greg, The making of Bigfoot: the inside story, Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2004 ISBN 1-59102-139-1 (Long was able to track down the man who wore the monkey suit for Roger Patterson's film, and obtained a complete confession of the hoax.)
• Markotic, Vladimir and Grover Krantz, editors, The Sasquatch and Other Unknown Primates, Western Publishers, 1984, ISBN 0-919119-10-7
• Mozino, Jose Mariano, Noticas de Nutka: An Account of Nootka Sound, Iris Higbe Wilson, editor and traslator, University of Washington Press, 1970, ISBN 0-295-95061-7
• Napier, John Russell Bigfoot: The Sasquatch and Yeti in Myth and Reality, 1973, E.P. Dutton, ISBN 0-525-06658-6
• Powell, Thom, The Locals, Hancock House, 2003, ISBN 0-88839-552-3
• Pyle, Robert Michael, Where Bigfoot Walks, Houghton Mifflin, 1995, ISBN 0-395-44114-5
• Sanderson, Ivan T., "First Photos of 'Bigfoot', California's Legendary 'Abominable Snowman'", Argosy, February 1968, pg 23-31, 127,128, ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN: a legend come to life.
• Sjögren, Bengt.Farliga djur och djur som inte finns, Prisma, 1962
• Shakley, Myra, Wildman: Yeti, Sasquatch and the Neanderthal Enigma, Thames and Hudson, 1973
• Sprague, Roderick, "Carved Stone Heads of the Columbia and Sasquatch" (in Halpin and Ames)
• Sprague, Roderick and Grover Krantz, editors, A Scientist Looks at the Sasquatch II, University Press of Idaho, 1978, ISBN 0-89301-061-8
• Suttles, Wayne, "On the Cultural Track of Sasquatch" (in Sprage and Krantz)
• Wasson, Barbara, Sasquatch Apparitions: A Critique on the Pacific Northwest Hominoid, self-published, 1979, ISBN 0-9614105-0-7
• http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/06/30/china.bigfoot/
• http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/bigfootRussia.htm
• http://skepdic.com/bigfoot.html
• http://www.who2.com/bigfoot.html

Further reading

• Long, Greg, The Making of Bigfoot: The Inside Story, 2004, Prometheus Books, ISBN 1-59102-139-1.

External links

Organizations

• Alliance of Independent Bigfoot Researchers - International organization which investigates sightings and conducts scientific research
• Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization
• Willow Creek - China Flat Museum - includes an entire building dedicated to Bigfoot, including foot print casts, maps, photos, and other documents
• Sasquatch Research Initiative (SRI)

Regional

• Georgia Bigfoot -investigating the Bigfoot Phenomenon in Georgia
• Pennsylvania Bigfoot Society - for information about Bigfoot on the East Coast
• Texas Bigfoot Research Center - for information about Bigfoot in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas & Louisiana
• West Coast Sasquatch - for information on Sasquatch in British Columbia, Canada
• Western Canadian Sasquatch Research Organization
• Bigfoot Discovery Museum - Bigfoot Museum located in Felton, California.

Science

• Article by Kal K. Korff and Michaela Kocis, in Skeptical Inquirer, July 2004
• Bigfoot - from the Skeptic's Dictionary
• Bigfoot-lives.com
• The Bigfoot Giganto Theory
• Information on Sivapithecus - Sivapithecus is the common ancestor to both orangutans and Gigantopithecus

Researchers

• Interview with Greg Long
• LorenColeman.com - website of legendary Bigfoot researcher, Loren Coleman

Paranormal or alternative theories

• Beckjord.com - a site maintained by Erik Beckjord, a controversial Bigfoot enthusiast
• Bigfoot Vanishing and other Bigfoot related Strangeness
• Hairy Humanoids

• Bigfoot
• Mysteries
• Hominid cryptids
• Pseudoscience
• Native American legendary creatures